Posted by
stevo on Saturday, September 20, 2008 3:52:13 PM
By the time Sarah Palin has the opportunity to make her own run for the Presidency, it may be too late. There are many reasons why classical liberalism, now termed conservatism, is unlikely survive in any significant form in the next ten years:
1) Persistent attacks: This is typical of the mainstream media and academic establishment, but the attacks are largely catching on. Many people believe Barack Obama when he describes the current economic downturn as the final nail in the coffin for "trickle-down economics." The rookie
Senator tells voters "to fire the whole trickle-down, on-your-own, look-the-other way crowd in Washington who has led us down this disastrous path." Obama is not merely trying to trim the outlying branches of conservatism, but hacking at the roots. In many of his speeches, he gives an atrocious caricature of supply-side economics and then demolishes his conservative strawman. These attacks are possible because of a...
2) Muted and lukewarm defense: While President Bush's tenure may be vindicate with regard to Iraq, his inability to defend a single conservative ideal will go down (in our circles, at least) as an abysmal failure. Many of his accomplishments, such as No Child Left Behind and his monstrous Medicare bill and farming subsidies, are not consistent with free market principles at all. When he did push personal savings accounts for Social Security, he was horribly inept at defending the concept. John McCain's
populist rhetoric doesn't help the cause either. Instead of defending the free market as the best hope for a revived economy and attacking government-backed monopolies, McCain is borrowing from Obama's adolescent handbook and attacking the "greedy" on Wall Street and proposing new government solutions (regulations).
3) Crisis decisions: In times of apparent crisis, the government proposes extensive solutions--usually involving new agencies (i.e. Department of Homeland Security after 9/11). While these solutions may alleviate the crisis on the hour, their long-term effects are often ignored. The Bush Administration is currently working with Congress to finance the
largest bailout since the Great Depression. Wall Street responded well, but what of the future? These housing and banking bubbles were created the implicit government backing of risky loans and shoddy business practices. The free market manages risk by offering incentives for innovation while punishing failure. By negating the negative coercion of the market, the government abused the free market. Now we have an opportunity to remove the invisible iron fist of government from the market, but instead are going to expand the power of the government over the market. Economist F.A. Hayak once noted that historically, monopolies are created through government interference on behalf of certain businesses, and such monopolies are often removed by a government with vastly-increased powers.
4) Silent-but-deadly policies: In my current work chronicling recent gases of government abuse, two issues have caught my eye over others: eminent domain and anti-discrimination laws. The concept of private property has been largely diminished by the ability of government and big business to confiscate whatever land they desire.
Eminent domain abuses are rampant as the government takes peoples' land for whimsical projects.
Anti-discrimination policies, in particular those defending ever-increasing homosexual rights, punish dissent against the prevailing government orthodoxy. Businesses around the country are being punished because the won't specifically endorse a lifestyle that is contrary to their beliefs. This isn't a Christian v. Gay issue, but a liberty v. government-coerced "equality" issue.
5) Inability to communicate: Conservatives are often trapped in the modernist mindset of defining and defending policies by objective standards. While this work must be done, it must be packaged in the language of "meaning." Today's postmodern society doesn't want a "good" policy, but a policy that is "good for me." Free market economics benefit a country's liberty and prosperity, but people need to know that is also benefits them. In other words, sound policies must be expressed in populist rhetoric. For example, when Maria wants dinner, she can go to the grocery store and pick from an array of options with different prices. She will get the dinner she wants because she picked the food according to her budget constraints. Why not allow that freedom with our health care or education? Because they are both highly regulated, the necessitate much more money while leaving options limited. Why pay for caviar when you would be happy with mac and cheese? Why settle for spamwich when you can have ham? Deregulated healthcare and education allow each person to care for their own bodies and raise their children with their money.
These examples are not exhaustive, but highlight the bleak predicament in which conservatives find themselves. Sarah Palin may be a newer version of Ronald Reagan, but her ability to combine substance with style won't matter if health care has been socialized, the market tightly regulated by an alphabet soup of government agencies, and the Supreme Court stacked with judges who have no respect for history or this nation's founding documents. In this day, we need our best and brightest on the frontlines. Michael Steele and Rep. Michele Bachmann have been particularly impressive recently...